Perhaps this Aussie croc got too close to coal?

Nope.  It was the toads.

Don't get me wrong, I am completely for salaries based on merit alone and think sex differentials should have zero, no difference.  But these reports about the pay in Mr. "Equal Pay" Obama's offices seem interesting, especially as compared to McCain -- although as with most such studies I do not presume a causal relationship to evidence of discrimination.  But since Obama, see here for example, does make such presumptions when there is a disparity in pay  . . . .

Click here and here for the reports.

I think these reports provide a ridiculous critique, but equally ridiculous are most of the claims, like Obama's, for coercive equal pay requirements rather than allowing the market to set salaries based on merit.

The Leader of the Don't Drill Democrats in the Senate declaims against two giant and productive industries that employ hundreds of thousands of Americans.  His full statement:

"The one thing we fail to talk about is those costs that you don't see on the bottom line. That is coal makes us sick, oil makes us sick; it's global warming. It's ruining our country, it’s ruining our world. We’ve got to stop using fossil fuel.”

(HT: The Corner).

I'll be talking about my new pamphlet on today's show --why I wrote it and who it is intended for.  Order it here from The New Pamphleteer.

Mike Allen's Politico.com story should be read closely as Allen has the best sources of any reporter close to Campaign 2008. 

No matter who the selection turns out to be, I'd prefer a nominee announcement sooner rather than as part of a "mitigation bounce" strategy as outlined by Mike.  Every day as the veep allows the nominee to make four or five appearances on the trail, generating enthusiasm and contributions, especially if the nominee is throwing hard punches at Obama.  30 or 60 days of extra effort is too much of an advantage to keep on the shelf pending an Obama selection.

Romney's four "Ms" --message (on the economy), money, Mormons (especially in Nevada and Colorado) and Michigan-- do make him a compelling choice, but Governor Tim Pawlenty with who I shared the ABC Green Room yesterday is also a strong contender because he would put the upper midwest into play.

It is easy for the war on terror and the domestic economy to deflect our attention from the ongoing efforts toward "global governance" and regulatory control from "global" entities.  I just came across an important essay published earlier this month where John Fonte, senior fellow and director of the Center for American Cultural Studies at the Hudson Institute explains these issues.

The essay:
“Global Governance vs. the Liberal Democratic Nation-State: What Is the Best Regime?.”
 
And here is a publisher's summary:

"The essay explores the growing push to move from an 'international system of sovereign nation states' to a 'transnational system of global governance.' According to Fonte, 'for many of the world’s elites the big project of the twenty-first century is how to achieve global governance.'
 . . .
This threat needs to be confronted, as 'the governing center-left has internalized global governance and is prepared to promote it' and 'the governing center-right has for the most part failed to engage on the issue' due to an 'underdeveloped conceptualization.' Rather than ignoring the seriousness of the global governance movement, Fonte says that it is important that the center-right recognize that 'global governance is a regime challenge.”" (empasis added)

For my perspective that NGOs are just another player in interest group politics in the greater global governance movement, download:

Donald J. Kochan, The Political Economy of the Production of Customary International Law: The Role of NGOs and United States Courts, 21 Berkeley J. Int'l L. 240 (2004).

Good fun on ABC this morning, though I suspect all of America turned the channel when Ralph Nader showed up after a very interesting exchange between Rahm Emanuel and Tim Pawlenty.  Governor P. was at his usual, amiable best, and Congressman Emanuel was demonstrating, again, why he is the Dems' best strategist --taking Obama's biggest vulnerability which has been a series of enormous flip flops out of play by attacking John McCain for flip flops.

The panel conversation was spirited, and believe it or not I enjoy being with Arianna and have done so for years.  Her attempt to turn me into fear-mongering by using my concern about Obama's weakness on national security coming home to the U.S. very soon after his election if it occurs demonstrates real concern on the left's part that Obama's Achilles' heel is the fact he is simply not credible on national security and homeland defense.   Katrina's also the real deal --a socialist through and through and an Obamian in the round.  Byron York is the steady, always observant reporter and George S. did a fine job of moving it along.  He and Chris Wallace will be waging a war for the Sunday morning show with the most influence over the next two years, and his willingness to book outside of the Beltway box was a good sign, and mixing partisans of the two candidates as opposed to "objective" MSMers in the tank for Obama was a refreshing change for Sunday morning talk.

ABC smartly has the roundtable participants continue the conversation in the Green Room afterwards, which can be seen here later when it is posted.  We talk about turnout and enthusiasm levels on both sides, and you should give it a look.

And then you should get a copy (or five) of Letter to a Young Obama Supporter and get them in the mail to young voters who will need some excellent arguments if they are going to shift to McCain.

From the Daily Telegraph.

The "Millennials" are leaning towards Obama by a large margin, and in some states, that could make the difference in the fall.

Thus my latest --a relatively short, 10,000 word pamphlet in soft-cover written for the 18 to 25 year old voter.  If you are a parent, grandparent, aunt, uncle, older sibling or just  a friend who would like to open the conversation with an Obama enthusiast, I think it will help.

I'll be part of tomorrow's roundtable segments with Arianna Huffington, Byron York, and Katrina vanden Heuvel.  The program opens with Minnesota Governor Tim Pawlenty and Illinois Congressman Rahm Emanuel.

Kudos to the folks at The New Pamphleteer for their entrepreneurial enterprise and to Hugh for continuing this traditional form of disseminating ideas in his recent pamphlet mentioned in the post below.

In addition to traditional print pamphlets, I have compared modern blogging to the same.  To downlosd thst article, click here:  Donald J. Kochan, The Blogosphere and the New Pamphleteers, 11 NEXUS L.J. 99 (2006) (symposium).

Pamphleteering – the distribution of ideas on law, social policy, politics, revolution, social change, and other subjects – has a long history.  For example, as Berring stated:

“Thomas Paine’s Common Sense [was] a pamphlet that changed the course of the history of the United States . . .” [Robert C. Berring, Deconstructing the Law Library: The Wisdom of Meredith Willson, 89 Minn. L. Rev. 1381, 1405 (2005)].

And as the Supreme Court stated in Citizens Aginst Rent Control/Coalition for Fair Housing v. City of Berkeley, 454 U.S. 290, 294 (1981):

“[T]he practice of persons sharing common views banding together to achieve a common end is deeply embedded in the American political process.  The 18th-century Committees of Correspondence and the pamphleteers were early examples of this phenomena and the Federalist Papers were perhaps the most significant and lasting example.”

Pamphlets can be a highly influential mechanism of expression,  As one author has stated:

“From pamphlets may be learned the genius of the age, the debates of the learned, the bevues of government, and mistakes of the courtiers. . . . they carry a reputation of wit and learning to all that make them their companions.” [Myles Davis, Icon Libellorum (1715), as quoted in H.L. Mencken, A New Dictionary of Quotations on historical principles from Ancient and Modern Sources 883 (Knopf ed. 1991) (1942).]

And as the Supreme Court stated in Talley v. California, 362 U.S. 60, 64 (1960): “Anonymous pamphlets, leaflets, brochures and even books have played an important role in the progress of mankind.”

So, I encourage all to get Hugh’s recent pamphlet and embrace this tradition.

The "Millennials" are leaning towards Obama by a large margin, and in some states, that could make the difference in the fall.

Thus my latest --a relatively short, 10,000 word pamphlet in soft-cover written for the 18 to 25 year old voter.  If you are a parent, grandparent, aunt, uncle, older sibling or just  a friend who would like to open the conversation with an Obama enthusiast, I think it will help.

In just a couple of weeks, Obama has flipped flopped on the D.C. gun ban, public financing, FISA reform, debating John McCain, the status of Jerusalem and when he'd meet with the dictators.  Even his supporters are having to admit that Obama's word is as reliable as ice cream in the D.C. heat.  Here's Juan Williams on yesterday's show. (The full transcript of the conversation with Juan and Fred Barnes is here.  The podcast is here.):

HH: Let me start with you, Juan. Are you more upset with the Supreme Court’s decision in Heller, or with Barack Obama’s backflip about it? He doesn’t really mind, it’s an individual right, he never really meant what he said about gun control. Which upsets you more? 

JW: Well, it’s becoming a pattern with Mr. Obama. He’s running to the center, and he’s running away…it’s interesting, because I guess the far left has nowhere to go, so he’s their option. But it’s so transparent, that I don’t know how people can get away with it. It’s going to give John McCain something to run on, though, in the sense of saying as a matter of character, who’s the real self-sacrificing individual here versus the politician who always moves in terms of expedience and opportunism. He can make that case, apparently. But I will say this… 

HH: Is he a bigger flip-flopper than John Kerry? 

JW: …in answer to your question, I’m upset about that Supreme Court decision. I’m not a fan of guns. They scare me, and there are just too many of them on the streets of this big, hot city. 

HH: Quick question, is Barack Obama a bigger flip-flopper than John Kerry? 

JW: I’ll let you be the judge. I think that Obama’s a pretty big flip-flopper at this moment....

HH: Juan Williams, let’s switch back to Obama’s flip-flops. He’s flip-flopped on the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act reauthorization, including this time, immunity for the telcoms. Are you disappointed that he’s flip-flopped there? 

JW: I am. I mean, again, to me, at least you would want to be consistent on something so important as civil liberties and the arguments that were put forward. I think what we’re seeing here, again, is pure politics. Now let me just say, you know, even extending back to the conversation we were just having about energy, you talk about flip-flops, John McCain is opposed, and was opposed, to all this drilling that you guys are proposing. Now he’s saying he’s willing to consider drilling in some areas, not all areas. But you know, you guys don’t talk about McCain’s flip-flops in this area. And when you talk about Obama’s flip-flops on FISA, I would agree. But you could also put it in this way – he has agreed to some of the very issues that were important to the President and to conservatives in terms of making sure that intelligence gathering is able to take place at maximum speed, although there will be a court, a FISA court, that will privately, secretly look at the issue. 

HH: Are you disappointed, Juan, that he flip-flopped on public financing and on agreeing to meet John McCain in the town hall settings?  

JW: I am. There’s no secret here. I think that in fact, I think it’s to his political advantage. I think people would find him more attractive, more glib than McCain. Although McCain does well in town hall meetings, I think Obama would outshine him, so I don’t see why Obama’s afraid to do it, except again, as a matter of politics, he’s kind of sitting on a lead. And then secondly, you know, when you think about Obama’s stand on the gun stuff, it seems to me, you know, it’s such an important issue for me, because I live in a big city, and I live in a neighborhood where people who are involved with crime are evident, and I just don’t like it. I don’t like the idea of guns everywhere on every corner. It worries me

Last December I visited Camp Pendleton, toured the Iraq battlefield simulation center there and was briefed by Col. Clark Lethin and retired Detroit policeman Greg Williams on the "combat hunter program" the Corps had developed to train its young Marines for the battlefield in Iraq.

Williams later appeared on the my radio show to discuss the program, and some additional media began to focus on the new tactics.

On Thursday USA Today ran a lengthy feature on the training that has helped transform the Corps approach to the counterinsurgency.

An excerpt:

On the battlefield, Marines and soldiers are facing a resourceful enemy that makes bomb detonators from washing-machine timers, garage-door openers or cellphones. They run around the battlefield in nothing more than dishdashas — or tunics — and sandals.

Yet, they have proved their ability to frustrate America's technological advantages. Insurgents continually found ways to build larger and more lethal bombs that would get around American technological fixes, says Patrick Lang, a retired Army Special Forces officer and former Middle East specialist in the Defense Intelligence Agency.

"Insurgents tied us in knots with these roadside bombs," Lang says.

Marine commanders were also looking for ways to overcome a key advantage insurgents have: They can easily hide among civilians.

"Finding is the problem," Mattis says. "Our soldiers, SEALs and Marines are quite capable of killing these guys. It's how do you find them."

Commanders turned to cops for advice, but they also looked within their own ranks — to Marines who grew up in inner cities.

"The inner-city kid has a unique perspective," says Greg Williams, a retired Detroit area police officer who was recruited by the military to help develop the program. "They have a stronger urban survival instinct. The inner city kid … will see the world a little differently, a little more opportunistically."

To assist with building the training, Williams said he relied on a couple Marine sergeants who grew up in the city and chose the Marine Corps over a life of gangs.

It may be the first time the military has considered growing up in a poor neighborhood as an asset. Some of the colonels and retired officers were initially skeptical that they would learn war fighting skills from young Marines who grew up in the inner city, Lethin says.

During a conference at Camp Pendleton last year, Williams and a sergeant took a group of skeptical senior officers for a walk in a nearby town. The sergeant pointed out dangerous neighborhoods based on where cars were parked, whether there were toys in the yards and other signs that they noticed but the older officers did not.

"When they came back, all the naysayers were thoroughly convinced we were on to something," Lethin says.

Marines can be taught to pick out criminals and insurgents trying to blend into a crowd, if they know what to look for, Williams says.

Lt. Patrick Zuber, whose platoon was the first unit to get combat hunter training in a pilot program last year, said the training made Marines better able to sniff out trouble before it happened.

Be sure to read the whole thing.  Almost every guest I have had from the military over the past two years --from General Petraeus to Sgt. Jones who helped design the simulation center-- have stressed the amazing ability of the American military to learn and adapt to the new battlefield in ways that allow our forces to destroy the enemy.  The success of the surge is a testament to this ability, and one cause for optimism concerning not just Iraq and Afghanistan but every battlefield in the wider war against jihadism.

If the voters support victory, they will get it.  In fact, they are getting it at this very moment.

Election 2008 will be a referendum on whether we throw it away.

Charles Krauthammer takes on Obama today in his Washington Post Op-Ed column, "The Ever Malleable Mr. Obama".

From the op-ed:

"The truth about Obama is uncomplicated. He is just a politician (though of unusual skill and ambition). The man who dared say it plainly is the man who knows Obama all too well. 'He does what politicians do,' explained Jeremiah Wright.. . .  By the time he's finished, Obama will have made the Clintons look scrupulous."